I respect you really for your keen interest and reasonable judgements.
However the argue of "Russians vs Indians" have no sense.
It just because between Sukhoi / TSAGI and HAL / DRDO scientific schools is 40 years of experience.
It's not good or bad, it's just is.
I am not getting into a debate between which is the better of the two. I am merely defending the HAL's director's remarks which you are dismissing as a report for domestic consumption.
but Indian engineers have nothing to contribute to the technical part of the project.
We really can't say for sure. That's where the problem lies. I suppose we will know more in the coming few months, when the R&D contract is signed.
1 - Yes, 30% of full empty weight and 70% of surface according to official sources (Stage 1) and will be encreased to 45/75 according to the same sources.
Okay, this is speculation, but IAF may be asking for 95%+ of surface area, like the LCA program.
2 - Not exactly
Indian engineers have an observers status in the project and will have more powers only on final stage, when they will incorporate non-crucial custom hardware (just like MKI). None of them participate in crucial parts development, just can order some info for their consideration and requirements gathering.
I am not so sure since there have been exchange of scientists and technicians between the two countries since the deal was signed in 2010. They are also working on linking HAL and Sukhoi bureaus into a single entity for the project.
According to our sources we will be developing most of the software for the FGFA. Meaning there will be the Russian made software for PAKFA and the Indo-Russian joint owned but Indian developed software. Not possible without being closely involved in the program.
We know for sure that the cockpit design is ours. HAL delivered the designs to SDB.
Comparable to WHAT PAK FA?
To Stage 1 - may be, to Stage 2 - doughtly.
Maybe both. First prototype of FGFA is sure to have 117. Final prototype may end up with Type 30. If both are made lighter, then both will have more thrust/weight than PAKFA. Overall, the director was obviously talking about the final version and not prototypes.
BTW, think about the price (technical, not money) of substitution of more critical parts with composite one on the top of the original Stage 2 body. Will it can withstand the same speeds and G-force like the original Stage 2? Devil is in those small things.
I agree. The rudder for the NAL Saras was supposed to be all composite. The rudder couldn't be built to specification, it supposedly kept getting stuck. So they had to change it to all metal rudder.
But if the plan is to replace metal parts with composites, let's simply not dismiss it like you are trying to do. Whether it finally works or not we will know only after a few years. Like I said, LCA is mostly composites all over and is a 1980s requirement, something much for FGFA may be required.
AFAIK, Indian composites industry can produce carbon-only materials which are insufficient for such a heavy and hard-working fighters like PAK FA. So, "lighter materials" will be possible only if Sukhoi and OAK will transfer aramide-aramide and carbon-aramide technologies to HAL. Aramides (like Kevlar) are very tricky materials with outstanding stretch and hit resistance, which is absent in carbon materials. But aramides have very short life (Kevlar lives 10 years only) due to molecular links degradation. Russians have a technology to produce aramides much cheaper than Kevlar and with 40 years of lifetime.
This is just speculation.
Agreed. But Sukhoi will use them for sure first. We have just seen only a prototypes, not a real production planes
What I am saying is that this is all done based on requirements. And requirements are constructed based on affordability and tech limitations. According to the earliest reports, when reports of the FGFA came out, which is supposed to have 43 requirements, Sukhoi stated that IAF requirements are higher than VVS's requirements. Now we don't know whether this is in reference to the entire gamut of capabilities of the aircraft or just in reference to electronics which is the core sticking point today which is leading to price rise. Meaning what Sukhoi said was if IAF wants extra toys that VVS has not asked for, IAF will have to pay for it.
All I am saying is don't dismiss anything unless we are sure.
My point is not whether FGFA is superior or PAKFA is superior. All I am saying is both can be made to be superior to the other and it all depends on requirements. If VVS does not want a more advanced aircraft, then it is obvious FGFA will be better. I hope you get my point. Meaning Su-35 is a very advanced aircraft. But IAF MKI will have AESA and other FGFA related technologies. So even if VVS has Su-35, IAF MKI will be a more advanced aircraft in terms of electronics with the AESA radar and AESA based ECM. So you can expect something similar for FGFA.
Yes, but not all the software. Control system and radar detecting and ECM selection algorythms will remain closed and Indians will get it in a "black box".
That's not what is officially known here. It seems there will be a joint ownership and full sharing of the source codes for all aspects of the program. It was made clear two years ago that India and Russia will have 50% IPR each for all foreground technologies while all background IPR will remain with the respective countries. Meaning if you designed and built the radar, you keep all the IPR to your facilities where you designed it, but we both share all the technologies directly related to the radar, including the source codes. Similarly, if we designed the mission computers, we retain ownership of our design and facilities while we give you the source codes and manufacturing information for it.
Could you be more specific on this? I first hear that India has AESA technologies suite.
There are three programs for AESA based suites apart from two other successful ones which are already operational in some capacities. Both Mig-27 and Mig-29UPG have AESA based EW suites which were developed with help from Elisra, Israeli company. I think it was derived from the LCA program.
Then there is a first stage program and then a second stage program for indigenous capability. First stage is happening as we speak, it will be ECM internal suites for both Jaguar (depends) and MKI based on GaAs modules followed by a phase 2 with GaN modules.
MKI's ECM suite seems to be for the Super MKI upgrade. It is being developed/manufactured under a project called Eagle Eye. There is something similar for Jaguar too, but I think it depends on the re-engine program.
While we have seen failures or delays in some larger programs like LCA, there have been tremendous successes in the areas of EW and radars in India. As in our entire BMD systems is based on AESA radars, there is no equivalent in the world. Meaning even Russia and US depend on PESA systems compared to ours, even if we had foreign help in developing it, Israel for Greenpine/Swordfsh and France for FCR.
